| REVIEW ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2023 | Volume
: 15
| Issue : 1 | Page : 28-33 |
|
|
Polyether ether ketones (PEEK): Properties and applications as implants for alternative dentistry materials: A narrative review
Imam S Azhar1, Rania G Syaharani2, Vanya S Smeer2, Multazan Multazan2
1 Department of Prosthodontics, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
2 Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
Correspondence Address:
Mr. Imam S Azhar
Jl. Major General Prof. Dr. Moestopo No. 47, Surabaya 60132, East Java
Indonesia
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jioh.jioh_10_22
|
|
|
Aim: Titanium has been a popular material for dental implants. However, there are several drawbacks to these materials, including the occurrence of allergies, bone resorption, surface damage, contamination linked to peri-implantitis, high modulus of elasticity, and less aesthetically pleasing hue. As a result, polyether ether ketone (PEEK) can be utilized as a substitute material in dentistry. The purpose of this review of the literature is to identify the attributes and uses of PEEK in dentistry, particularly for implant applications. Materials and Methods: The articles were independently evaluated during the screening procedures in accordance with the eligibility requirements. The criteria also include studies that are written in English and published on PubMed, ScienceDirect, ResearchGate, and Web of Science, as well as narrative reviews, research articles, and other studies. Articles published before 2014, case reports, case series, book chapters, and articles not related to PEEK in dentistry were excluded in the criteria. Strategy to find articles using PICO includes patients in needs of dental implants, PEEK, titanium, and PEEK as an alternative material for dental implant. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 (RoB 2). Results: A total of 26 articles were identified, of which 16 were of particular relevance to the use of PEEK in dental applications, especially implants. Conclusion: Due to its low elastic modulus, good mechanical structures, and bone-contact biocompatibility when used as a bulk implant, PEEK can be a substitute material in oral implantology. It is possible to improve PEEK’s bone-contact biocompatibility and lessen its downsides by altering the material’s surface and mixing. |
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
